Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 63
4
International Organization and
Management of an
Ocean Exploration Program
No nation owns the oceans, and no nation has the financial, intellec-
tual, or technological capacity to undertake a truly global program of ocean
exploration alone. The challenge of exploring such a vast and diverse
environment will be met with the financial, human, and equipment resources
of many partners. International collaboration is the best avenue to a global
exploration program.
Nearly half of the people on Earth live within 100 km of an ocean
(World Resources Institute, 2001 ), and demands on the ocean for resources
and waste disposal are increasing as the population expands. Exploration in
the coastal ocean requires the active participation of the coastal nations that
control exclusive economic zones. Moreover, given the considerable eco-
nomic investment and effort needed for global ocean exploration, the United
States can not by itself explore the vast regions of the ocean yet unknown
and beyond the control of any single nation.
To promote and sustain an effective ocean exploration program, it is
important to involve scientists and governments from many nations in a
truly global effort. Most nations of the world have an ocean frontier, but
ocean processes affect all nations, and the benefits of an ocean exploration
program are global. Capabilities for ocean exploration are widely dis-
tributed around the globe, and no single nation can afford the kind of broad
effort of greatest benefit to all.
Managing a large-scale, international ocean exploration program will
require an organizational model that is sufficiently flexible to attract a diverse
array of national and international participants while still providing adequate
structure to ensure consistency in direction, information dissemination and
management, and funding.
As part of the work of the committee on Exploration of the Seas, the
International Global Ocean Exploration (IGOE) Workshop was convened to
examine the possibilities for establishing a program and to air the concerns
63
OCR for page 64
64
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
of various nations in beginning an ocean exploration effort. Seventy-three
representatives from 22 nations met in Paris in May 2002 to discuss their
interests in ocean exploration. Appendix C is an agenda and a list of
participants, and Appendix D summarizes the proceedings. Presentations
and discussions at the workshop made it clear that only a few countries
have the interest, funding, and ocean-going ability to justify participation in
a truly global ocean exploration program.
Discussions and presentations at the Workshop suggested that a coordi-
nated international organization for ocean exploration should be designed
to accommodate the following goals:
promote and support the highest quality science and technology;
provide for the development and application of promising new tech-
nology by leveraging the capabilities of international partners;
encourage the broadest possible participation to achieve a synergistic
effect and worldwide implementation;
develop an international voice for ocean exploration;
encourage increased international funding for exploration;
provide the most efficient access to and use of platforms and capa-
bi I ities;
support the broadest possible and most efficient methods for sharing
information;
reduce political barriers to exploration and research;
· include developing countries in partnership and capacity building;
and
emphasize and promote effective international education and public
outreach.
.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES
I International oceanograph ic programs (Table 4.1 ) use a variety of man-
agement and oversight structures and involve many nations depending on
.. . . .
~ . . .. . , , . , . ~
fine research topics addressed. Participation in existing oceanographic
programs might be the most effective way to initially identify potential
international partners for new exploration efforts.
As presented by Dr. Minster, Chair of the French Institute for Exploita-
tion of the Sea, major barriers to international cooperation can arise when
funds must be pooled from different nations to support a large, international
research program. In order of decreasing complexity, and therefore decreas-
ing need for extensive, often difficult, negotiations are:
OCR for page 65
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
TABLE 4.1 Selected International Oceanographic Programs
65
Title Goals and Objectives
Principal Participating
Countries
Additional Participating
Countries
Baltic Sea
Regional
Project
(BSRP)
Census of
Marine Life
(CoML)
Global
Climate
Observing
System
(GCOS)
BSRP develops ecosystem
management tools for the
Baltic Sea ecosystem.
CoML conducts research to
assess and explain the
diversity, distribution, and
abundance of marine
organisms throughout the
world's oceans.
GCOS is a long-term,
user-driven operational system
that provides comprehensive
observations required for
monitoring the climate system;
detecting and attributing
climate change; assessing the
consequences of climate
variability and change; and
supporting research toward
improved understanding,
modeling, and prediction of
the climate system. It
addresses the total climate
system, including physical,
chemical, and biological
properties and atmospheric,
oceanic, hydrologic,
cryospheric, and terrestrial
processes.
International Council for
Exploration of the Sea
(ICES) Members:
Belgium, Canada, Denmark,
Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Iceland, Ireland,
Latvia, Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Russia,
Spain, Sweden, United
Kingdom, United States
Denmark, Japan,
United States
Steering Committee:
Canada, China, France,
Germany, Japan, Kenya,
Malaysia, Norway, Russia,
United Kingdom, United States
ICES Observers:
Australia, Chile, Greece,
New Zealand, Peru,
South Africa
Scientific Steering
Committee:
Intergovernmental
Oceanographic
Commission (IOC)
Membersa
continued
OCR for page 66
66
TABLE 4.1 Continued
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
Principal Participating Additional Participating
Title Goals and Objectives Countries Countries
Global GEOHAB fosters international Scientific Steering Committee: IOC Members
Ecology and cooperative research on Canada, Chile, China, Finland,
Oceanography harmful algal blooms in France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Scientific Committee on
of Harmful similar ecosystem types by South Africa, Spain, United Oceanic Research (SCOR)
Algal Blooms comparing the key species Kingdom, United States Membersb
(GEOHAB) involved and the
oceanographic processes that
influence their population
dynamics.
Global Ocean GLOBEC will address how Germany, Norway, United Angola, Denmark,
Ecosystem global ecosystem change Kingdom, United States Farce Islands (Denmark),
Dynamics influences the abundance, France, Iceland, Namibia,
Program diversity, and productivity of South Africa
(GLOBEC) marine populations—primarily
zooplankton (the assemblage
of herbivorous grazers on the
phytoplankton and the
primary carnivores that prey
on them)—that constitute a
major component of oceanic
ecosystems.
Global GLOSS aims at the IOC Executive Council
Sea Level establishment of high-quality
Observing global and regional sea level IOC Members
System networks for application to
(GLOSS) climate, oceanographic, and World Meteorological
coastal sea level research. Organization (WOO) Members
Global GOOS is a permanent global Steering Committee: International Council of
Ocean system for observation, Argentina, Australia, Bermuda, Scientific Unions (ICSU)
Observing modeling, and analysis of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Members'
System marine and ocean variables to Germany, India, Italy, Japan,
(GODS) support operational ocean Kenya, Netherlands, Norway, IOC Executive Council
services worldwide. GOOS will Philippines, South Africa,
provide accurate descriptions Switzerland, United Kingdom, IOC Members
of the state of the oceans, United States
including living resources; United Nations
continuous forecasts of the Environment Programme
conditions of the sea for as Governing Councild
far ahead as possible; and
the basis for predictions of WOO Members (IOC
climate change. Members plus the
following)e
OCR for page 67
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
TABLE 4.1 Continued
67
Title Goals and Objectives
Principal Participating
Countries
Additional Participating
Countries
Integrated
Ocean
Drilling
Program
(IODP)
International
Ridge
Inter-
disciplinary
Global
Experiments
Studies
(Inter-RIDGE)
IODP builds on the Ocean
Drilling Program, is slated to
begin October 1, 2003, as an
international program of
scientific research that uses
multiple integrated platforms
to drill, core, and log in
oceanic settings to investigate
Earth system processes.
Inter-RIDGE is an international,
interdisciplinary initiative
concerned with all aspects of
mid-ocean ridges. It is
designed to encourage
scientific and logistical
coordination, with particular
focus on problems that cannot
be addressed as efficiently by
nations acting alone or in
limited partnerships. Its
activities range from
dissemination of information
on existing, single-institution
experiments to initiation of
fully multinational projects.
International Working Group:
Australia, Canada, China,
European Union (Austria,
Belgium, Denmark, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece,
Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Portugal, Spain,
Sweden, United Kingdom),
France, Germany, Japan,
Sweden, United States
IODP Management
International, Inc., with
Board of Governors from the
United States and Japan.
France, Japan, United
Kingdom, United States
Associate Members:
Canada, Germany, India,
Italy, Korea, Norway,
Portugal
Corresponding Members:
Australia, Austria, Brazil,
China, Denmark, Iceland,
Mauritius, Mexico,
Morocco, New Zealand,
Philippines, Russia, South
Pacific (American Samoa
[Associate], Australia, Cook
Islands, Fiji Islands, French
Polynesia [Associate],
Guam, Kiribati, Marshall
Islands, Micronesia, Nauru,
New Caledonia [Associate],
New Zealand, Niue, Papua
New Guinea, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Vanuatu), South
Africa, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland
continued
OCR for page 68
68
TABLE 4.1 Continued
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
Title Goals and Objectives
Principal Participating
Countries
Additional Participating
Countries
Joint Global
Ocean Fl ux
Study
(JGOFS)
Ocean
Drilling
Program
(ODP)
JGOFS research is on the
processes that control regional
to global and seasonal to
interannual fluxes of carbon
between the atmosphere,
surface ocean, and ocean
interior, and their sensitivity
to climate changes.
ODP is an international
partnership of scientists and
research institutions organized
to explore the evolution and
structure of Earth. ODP
provides researchers around
the world access to a vast
repository of geological and
environmental information
recorded far below the ocean
surface in seafloor sediments
and rocks.
International Geosphere-
Biosphere Programme (IGBP)
Scientific Committee:
Australia, Belgium, China,
Denmark, France, Germany,
India, Japan, Kenya,
Netherlands, South Africa,
United Kingdom, United States
ICSU Members
SCOR Members
European Consortium
(Belgium, Denmark, Finland,
Iceland, Ireland, Italy,
Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland),
Germany, Japan, United
Kingdom, United States
Pacific Rim Consortium:
Australia, Canada, Chinese
Taipei, South Korea
IGBP National Committee:
Argentina, Australia,
Austria, Bangladesh,
Belgium, Benin, Bolivia,
Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria,
Cameroon, Canada,
Caribbean, Chile, China,
Colombia, Comoros,
Congo, Cuba, Czech
Republic, Denmark,
Ecuador, Egypt, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany,
Ghana, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, India, Indonesia,
Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory
Coast, Jamaica, Japan,
Kenya, Korea, Lebanon,
Malaysia, Mexico,
Mongolia, Netherlands,
New Zealand, Niger,
Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan,
Peru, Philippines, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Russia,
Senegal, Sierra Leone,
Slovakia, South Africa,
Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden,
Switzerland, Syria,
Tajikistan, Tanzania,
Thailand, Togo, Tunisia,
Turkey, Uganda, United
Kingdom, United States,
Venezuela, Vietnam,
Zambia, Zimbabwe
Associate Members:
China, France
OCR for page 69
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
TABLE 4.1 Continued
69
Title Goals and Objectives
Principal Participating
Countries
Additional Participating
Countries
South Pacific
Sea Level and
Climate
Monitoring
Project
Surface
Ocean-Lower
Atmosphere
Study
(SOLAS)
Tropical
Ocean Global
Atmosphere/
Coupled
Ocean
Atmosphere
Response
Experiment
(TOGA/COARE)
World
Climate
Research
Program
(WCRP)
The objective is to provide an
accurate long-term record of
sea levels in the South Pacific
for partner countries and the
international scientific
community that enables them
to respond to and manage
related effects.
The goal of SOLAS is to
provide quantitative
information about important
biogeochemical-physical
interactions and feedbacks
between the ocean and the
atmosphere and to explain
how this coupled system
affects and is affected by
climate and environmental
change.
TOGA/COARE is an
international research
program on the interaction
or coupling of the ocean and
atmosphere in the western
Pacific warm pool region.
WCRP's goal is to promote
fundamental scientific
understanding of the physical
climate system and climate
processes needed to
determine to what extent
climate can be predicted and
the extent of human influence
on climate.
Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia,
Nauru, Niue, Palau,
Papua New Guinea, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Vanuatu
National Planning Committees
or Funded Research Programs:
Australia, Belgium, Brazil,
Canada, China, France,
Germany, India, Japan,
Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, Taiwan, United
Kingdom, United States
Steering Committee:
Brazil, Canada, Denmark,
France, Germany, India, Japan,
Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, United Kingdom,
United States
Australia, China, France,
Indonesia, Japan, New Zealand,
Papua New Guinea, Solomon
Islands, South Korea, Taiwan,
United Kingdom, United States
Country participation depends
on the WCRP program
(see below).
ICSU Members
IGBP National Committee
IGBP Scientific Committee
SCOR Members
World Climate Research
Programme Scientific
Committee:
Australia, Canada, China,
Ecuador, India, Iran, Japan,
Kenya, Russia, United
Kingdom, United States
Canada, Germany,
Malaysia, Micronesia,
Nauru, New Caledonia,
Philippines, Russia,
Singapore
continued
OCR for page 70
70
TABLE 4.1 Continued
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
Title Goals and Objectives
Principal Participating
Countries
Additional Participating
Countries
Climate
Variability
and
Predictability
(CLIVAR)
Global
Energy and
Water Cycle
Experiment
CLIVAR studies physical
processes responsible for
seasonal, interannual, decadal,
and centennial climate
variability and predictability
through collection and
analysis of observations and
the development and
application of models of the
coupled climate system,
in cooperation with other
relevant climate research
programs.
This project studies the
hydrological cycle and energy
fluxes by means of global
measurements of atmospheric
and surface properties; models
the global hydrological cycle
and its influence on the
atmosphere, oceans, and land
surfaces; develops predictive
models for the variations of
global and regional
hydrological processes and
water resources and their
response to environmental
change; and advances
development of observation
techniques, data management,
and assimilation systems for
operational application to
long-range weather forecasts,
hydrology, and climate
predictions.
Canada, European Union
(Austria, Belgium, Denmark,
Finland, France, Germany,
Greece, Ireland, Italy,
Luxembourg, Netherlands,
Portugal, Spain, Sweden,
United Kingdom), Germany,
Netherlands, New Zealand,
United States
Scientific Steering Group:
Brazil, China, France, Germany,
Japan, Norway, Russia,
United Kingdom, United States
OCR for page 71
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
TABLE 4.1 Continued
71
Title Goals and Objectives
Principal Participating
Countries
Additional Participating
Countries
World Ocean The object is to explain ocean Intergovernmental Panel: Argentina, Congo, Costa
Circulation circulation well enough to Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Rica, Farce Islands
Experiment model its current state; predict China, Colombia, France, (Denmark), Indonesia,
(WOCE) its future state; predict Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Korea, Peru, South Africa,
feedback between climate New Zealand, Nordic Countries Ukraine, Uruguay
change and ocean circulation; (Denmark, Finland, Iceland,
and develop and implement, Norway, Sweden), Portugal,
in consultation with the Russia, Spain, United Kingdom,
CLIVAR Scientific Steering United States
Group, an effective transition
of remaining WOCE scientific
activities and infrastructure to
CLIVAR as WOCE approaches
its end.
alOC Executive Council members are italicized. Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde,
Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana,
Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory
Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania,
Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria,
Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi
Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Attica, Spain, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey,
Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen.
bArgentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, France,
Germany, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Peru,
Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
CArgentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh (Associate), Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria,
Burkina Faso (Associate), Cameroon (Associate), Canada, Caribbean (Associate), Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia (Associate), Germany, Ghana, Greece,
Guatemala (Associate), Hungary, India, Indonesia (Observer), Iran (Observer), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast
(Associate), Jamaica (Observer), Japan, Jordan (Associate), Kazakhstan (Associate), Kenya, Korea (Observer), Latvia,
Lebanon, Lithuania, (former Yugoslav Republic of) Macedonia, Madagascar (Associate), Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova
(Observer), Monaco, Mongolia (Observer), Morocco, Mozambique (Associate), Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria,
Norway, Pakistan (Observer), Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal (Associate),
Seychelles (Associate), Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan (Observer), Swaziland (Observer),
Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo (Observer), Tunisia (Associate), Turkey, Uganda (Associate), Ukraine
(Observer), United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Vietnam (Observer), Zimbabwe.
dAntigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Belgium, Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chad, China, Colombia, Congo,
Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, France, Gambia, Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Iran,
Italy, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Libya, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Moldova, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Sudan, Suriname, Switzer-
land, Syria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
OCR for page 72
72
TABLE 4.1 Continued
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
eAntigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam,
Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Djibouti, Honduras, Hungary, Kazakstan, Kyrgyz
Republic, Laos, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, (former Yugoslav Republic of) Macedonia, Malawi, Mali,
Micronesia, Moldova, Mongolia, Nepal, Niger, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Rwanda, Sac Tome and Principe,
Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Yugoslavia, Zambia,
Zimbabwe.
· shared investments that require formal long-term agreements at the
national level (e.g., the Jason 11 satellite involved the National Aero-
nautics and Space Administration, the Centre National d'Etudes
Spatiales, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological
Satel I ites);
shared operational costs, which only requires informal, ad hoc agree-
ments at the agency level (e.g., the Ocean Dri l l i ng Program tODPi,
the International Marine Global Change Study);
coordinated international programs without money exchange, just
the informal, good-will cooperation of partners (e.g., the Inter-
national Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, the World Climate
Research Programme), although insecurity of funding is a disadvan-
tage and program flexibility is an advantage; and
· cooperative experiments that only need specific, short-term agree-
ments between agencies (e.g., tectonics in the Gulf of Corinth or
deep water formation in the North Atlantic).
Assuming that there is agreement on scientific objectives of a specific
international program, formal agreements are preferred to allow the sharing
of operation costs for infrastructure; negotiation of specific funding at the
national level; and the pooling of funds for implementation of common
objectives. In addition to lacking flexibility, it is important to include assess-
ment and evaluation procedures i n those agreements. I nformal agreements
are more tractable for program management, sharing existing tools and
infrastructure, and maintaining flexibility.
Following a discussion of Dr. Minster's presentation, the general con-
sensus of the participants was that informal agreements and contributions of
national assets would be the most likely route for successfully implementing
a large scale international ocean exploration program. Cooperating nations
OCR for page 73
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
need the freedom to participate in topical and regional exploration that
serves the best interest of their citizens, without maintaining financial
responsibility for exploration that does not meet their national needs.
The greatest level of international involvement is likely to occur when
collaboration is based on each nation targeting its resources to thematic or
geographic areas of national interest (Appendix D). Ocean exploration has
the potential to engage many nations, both through establishing national
programs focused on their own territorial waters and through participation
in international cooperative efforts centered in regions or on topics of par-
ticular interest. For example, a smaller number of nations would be able to
contribute to Arctic exploration than to marine biodiversity studies. Joint
projects should be approved by each nation, with cost-sharing opportunities
developed as an incentive to move sound project plans forward. Those
distinctly international programs would allow the most flexibility for partici-
pating nations.
A number of specific program management arrangements, past and
I, . .
present, were discussed at the IGOE Workshop. The most frequently referred
to was ODP (Box 4.11. The advantage of ODP's organization is the ability
to pool international funds to support one unique facility, the drill ship.
73
ODP is an international partnership of researchers and academic institutions that collabo-
rate on using deep ocean drilling and coring to explore the evolution and structure of the Earth.
U.S. funding for ODP is provided by a single agency (the National Science Foundation), but it is
administered by the Joint Oceanographic Institutions, a not-for-profit corporation that receives
funding from 23 countries. Contractors for facilities and services are selected competitively. A
science committee provides guidance, and peer panels develop program plans and select
expeditions. Performance evaluation committees report regularly to a governing board on the
performance of contractors and the corporation. This program model allows ample opportunity
for, and relies on, community participation and buy-in. Such openness to public, academic, and
private-sector participation would benefit an ocean exploration program. ODP has been account-
able in its performance; the budget is transparent, and an audit is performed annually. Inter-
national partners have been actively engaged since 1974, exemplifying the global participation
that will be critical to an ocean exploration program. Bilateral agreements have effectively
facilitated international collaboration and, as a result of the success of the Joint Oceanographic
Institutions, a new international not-for-profit corporation has been formed for the new phase
of ocean drilling, the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program.
OCR for page 74
74
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
.
International collaboration is robust in ODP 22 nations participate effec-
tively under a collection of bilateral agreements. The model also allows for
scientific review of proposals, open participation in the proposal process,
and frequent dialogue among managers, science advisory, and facilities
panels. While the example that ODP sets is useful for framing the manage-
ment of an ocean exploration program, ODP itself would not be an appro-
priate program for operation of the program due to its emphasis on drilling,
rather than more interdisciplinary efforts. Furthermore, the ODP model,
designed to facilitate managing a single. Iamb asset. does not encourage
- O - - ~ -- -- - - O O - - O -' - O- - -- - -' - - -- - - - - - - - O-
·. . - ~ .- · . . .. . . . . . .
contributions ot diverse, Independently owned and operated assets, such as
those necessary for exploration. While it might be possible for those nations
to combine forces to mount an international ocean exploration program,
either modeled after or included within the highly successful ODP, the
IGOE Workshop participants did not find a compelling rationale for such a
recommendation.
In fact, many more nations than the current ODP membership are
interested in exploring their own territorial waters and neighboring ocean
basins. Several of those countries are near largely unexplored areas of the
global ocean, notably the Southern and Arctic Oceans. A single inter-
national program is of less interest to these nations than more targeted
programs specifically addressing geographic or topical areas of national
interest. As highlighted at the IGOE Workshop, the full range of topics and
regions that could be incorporated into an exploration program is too broad
to allow for effective international partnering and management.
Other nations might follow a U.S. example by forming national ocean
exploration i n itiatives. Lead organ izations for those national programs cou Id
be government agencies, such as that proposed by this report for the United
States, or other relevant institutions. As such parallel programs are established
it could become necessary to set up an informal umbrella organization to
provide information sharing and coordination among national programs.
An excellent template for this process is the U.S. Ridge Interdisciplinary
Global Experiments (RIDGE) program, which prompted other nations to set
up their own programs for interdisciplinary study of midocean ridges. Inter-
RIDGE is the international coordinating organization.
INVITATION TO OCEAN EXPLORATION WITHIN THE ANNUAL
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY OCEAN RESOLUTION
The importance of international ocean exploration should be discussed
at high levels of international governance. It would be useful for the U.S.
OCR for page 75
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Department of State to coordinate with the United Nations Law of the Sea
Office and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) to pro-
pose a new statement about the importance of ocean exploration in the
annual General Assembly ocean resolution (Box 4.21. For some years, the
United Nations General Assembly has adopted a resolution with recom-
mendations concerning ocean issues (e.g., Law of the Sea of 1994, 49th
General Assembly, A/RES/49/28; Oceans and Law of the Sea of 1998, 53rd
General Assembly, A/RES/53/32; Oceans and Law of the Sea of 2002, 57th
General Assembly, A/RES/57/141 ). This proposed resolution calls attention
to the promise of ocean exploration, and it would be a significant vehicle
for stating the desirability of broad international participation.
VOLUNTARY INFORMATION SHARING
Broad information sharing about ocean exploration initiatives, whether
undertaken by the United States or by other nations, should be encouraged.
A proposed model for information sharing is detailed in Figure 4.1, and it
would include information about current exploration programs; potentially
available resources, including ships and scientists; and proposals for explo-
ration. IOC of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
75
Whereas basic knowledge about Earth's oceans is in the overall interest of humankind;
Recognizing there are large areas of the ocean in which we lack such basic knowledge; and
Convinced that cooperation in oceans exploration (seeking basic knowledge about the
oceans and ocean processes) holds promise to enhance understanding of our planet.
The General Assembly:
Urges nations to seek to enhance basic understanding about the oceans through programs
and activities of ocean exploration and to cooperate together to that end;
Calls upon IOC to consider establishing a voluntary information-sharing program for the
cooperative sharing of information about ocean exploration, including planned programs and
proposals, institutional and national interests, scientific and technical expertise, capacity build-
ing capabilities, available oceanographic ships, and other national or institutional resources
available for such exploration; and
Nothing in this resolution is intended to affect the legal regime for the oceans as set out in
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
OCR for page 76
76
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
FIGURE 4.1 IOC voluntary information-sharing process for ocean exploration.
Organization is well positioned to execute such a function and might also
be able to assist in communicating with governments the importance of
cooperative ocean exploration. IOC also might consider sponsoring an
annual conference on ocean exploration at IOC headquarters to solicit
input for existing programs and discuss potential new collaborations, while
seeking advice from the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research and
other interested entities as appropriate. The IGOE Workshop hosted by IOC
demonstrated great international interest, as well as capabilities, in ocean
exploration from developed and developing countries from many regions
and for many disciplines.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
A host of factors must be considered prior to establishing any inter-
national exploration program. At a minimum, each participating nation
must agree to data standards and access policies. Several issues must be
resolved before international collaborative programs become common-
olace. Mechanisms must be established for sharing data, equipment, and
OCR for page 77
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
costs; for use prioritization; for safety; and for access to areas within each
country's exclusive economic zone.
Agreements also must include consideration of asset sharing. In the
simplest agreements, each nation would maintain financial responsibility
for its participants and equipment in any joint projects. Costs for partici-
pants from nonpartner nations, such as those from developing nations in the
region being explored, should be considered and shared by the partners.
Cooperative oceanograph ic research rel ies on the avai labi I ity of
specialized, often customized and expensive, equipment. Because most
oceanographic equipment is not insured, one challenge to sharing equip-
ment is whether the borrower can guarantee to replace or repair lost or
damaged equipment. Sharing equipment also presents the problem of use
prioritization. Planning is critical for oceanographic work, and equipment
must be avai fable for loadi ng, use, restoration, and repai r, if necessary. If a
promised piece of equipment becomes unavailable because of poor plan-
ning or unforeseen complications, time, resources, and sometimes even the
entire project can be wasted or jeopardized. Those problems can be
addressed in bilateral agreements and through strict enforcement of contracts.
Safe practices are required to ensure personal safety and equipment
integrity. Some countries have rigorous safety programs such as the
University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System within the United
States that are strictly enforced and followed. Many countries, however,
do not have such rigorous standards. Researchers who use oceanographic
assets operated by countries with less rigorous safety standards than those of
the United States assume their own risk some unknowingly. To amelio-
rate th is situation, and to protect the un knowi ng, each participant nation i n
an international program should develop and publish safety standards with
verifiable check points to ensure that a legitimate program is in place and
used effectively.
Finding: A single, all-encompassing international program is not
feasible at the initial stages of program development. A single inter-
national global ocean exploration effort would likely be overcome by
the bureaucratic structure under which it operated. Building coopera-
tive agreements for shared projects should be a more effective approach
to program development.
Recommendation: Given the considerations presented, it is prudent to
begin an exploration effort with a model for a U.S. national program
that will encourage collaboration and capacity building and that would
be likely to lead to the development of similar programs in other
77
OCR for page 78
78
EXPLORATION OF THE SEAS
countries. Once other national programs are established, consortia of
nations can voluntarily collaborate on program plans and pool
resources using multilateral international agreements to undertake
regional exploration or to pursue themes of shared interest. By devel-
oping distinct exploration programs for international cooperation to
seek discoveries of specific resources or investigate regional features,
the burden of international policy and agreements will be greatly
reduced.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
exploration program
